PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the efficacy of two different biopsy forceps with respect to their functionality and quality for histological assessment of upper urinary tract biopsies. METHODS: We compared flow rates, active deflection angle and histological quality of specimens taken from upper urinary tract biopsies of 40 consecutively treated patients between October 2011 and October 2012. Two different biopsy forceps [group A = 20 patients: "Piranha (®) " (Boston Scientific, Natick, USA) versus group B = 20 patients: "EF-120-00-3F" (Euromedical GmbH, Siegsdorf, GER)] were assessed. RESULTS: The specimens obtained with the "EF-120-00-3F" were superior in terms of tissue preservation such as intact urothelium/tissue fragmentation and the prevention of artifacts due to tissue compression (existence of artifacts/nucleus evaluation). Furthermore, due to superiority of tissue preservation, tissues obtained with the "EF-120-00-3F" showed better tissue orientation in the sense of anatomic evaluation of invasion and deep layer involvement. Irrigation flow rates did not differ significantly while deflection angle was more impaired with the "Piranha" biopsy forceps. No difference was observed with the handling of both biopsy forceps. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the "EF-120-00-3F" biopsy forceps represent a valuable modification of antegradely insertable instruments that qualifies for improved and correct staging as well as diagnosis of upper urinary specimens in comparison with standard biopsy forcipes.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the efficacy of two different biopsy forceps with respect to their functionality and quality for histological assessment of upper urinary tract biopsies. METHODS: We compared flow rates, active deflection angle and histological quality of specimens taken from upper urinary tract biopsies of 40 consecutively treated patients between October 2011 and October 2012. Two different biopsy forceps [group A = 20 patients: "Piranha (®) " (Boston Scientific, Natick, USA) versus group B = 20 patients: "EF-120-00-3F" (Euromedical GmbH, Siegsdorf, GER)] were assessed. RESULTS: The specimens obtained with the "EF-120-00-3F" were superior in terms of tissue preservation such as intact urothelium/tissue fragmentation and the prevention of artifacts due to tissue compression (existence of artifacts/nucleus evaluation). Furthermore, due to superiority of tissue preservation, tissues obtained with the "EF-120-00-3F" showed better tissue orientation in the sense of anatomic evaluation of invasion and deep layer involvement. Irrigation flow rates did not differ significantly while deflection angle was more impaired with the "Piranha" biopsy forceps. No difference was observed with the handling of both biopsy forceps. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the "EF-120-00-3F" biopsy forceps represent a valuable modification of antegradely insertable instruments that qualifies for improved and correct staging as well as diagnosis of upper urinary specimens in comparison with standard biopsy forcipes.
Authors: Giovanni Lughezzani; Maximilian Burger; Vitaly Margulis; Surena F Matin; Giacomo Novara; Morgan Roupret; Shahrokh F Shariat; Christopher G Wood; Richard Zigeuner Journal: Eur Urol Date: 2012-02-23 Impact factor: 20.096
Authors: Aart J Van Der Molen; Nigel C Cowan; Ullrich G Mueller-Lisse; Claus C A Nolte-Ernsting; Satoru Takahashi; Richard H Cohan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: T R W Herrmann; T Bach; F Imkamp; H Tezval; C Klot; U Jonas; A J Gross; M Burchardt Journal: World J Urol Date: 2007-06-05 Impact factor: 3.661